Davison v. H.L. Goble Co., Inc.
This text of 181 A. 35 (Davison v. H.L. Goble Co., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This appeal is directed at judgments against the appellants and in favor of the respondents. Three grounds are urged, error in refusal to nonsuit, to direct a verdict as to both appellants for the reason that “there are no inferences that may be drawn from the facts showing actionable negligence upon the part of the operator of the Neal car,” and as to the appellant Irene B. Neal, because “the operator of the car was not her servant at the time.”
The proofs were in such condition as to require a settlement of them by the jury. There was such submission. There being no error in refusing to grant the motions the judgments under review are affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Van Buskirk, Heteield, Dear, Wells, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
181 A. 35, 115 N.J.L. 499, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davison-v-hl-goble-co-inc-nj-1935.